►
From YouTube: Planning Committee - August 25, 2022 (part 2)
Description
Planning Committee meeting of August 25, 2022
Agenda and supporting documents available at www.ottawa.ca/agendas
A
C
Thanks,
I
I
just
wanted
to
ask
the
population
numbers
our
projections
and
where
we
are
today
seem
to
be
behind.
Our
actuals
seem
to
be
behind
projected,
and
you
know
over
the
course
of
the
next
25
years.
That's
got
a
compounding
effect
in
terms
of
of
annual
increases
that
could
see
25
years
from
now,
a
significantly
different
population
in
ottawa
than
we're
projecting
today,
while
our
official
plan
is
still
going
through.
Could
I
just
ask,
and-
and
maybe
royce
sets
yours
as
our
demographer
or
what?
C
D
E
Yeah,
mr
chair,
so
through
the
staff
estimates
are
also
a
different
method
from
what
the
projections
use
and
the
projections
are
based
off
of
statistics.
Canada's
potential
estimates
so
they're
just
into
entirely
different
methods
and
both
methods
are
the
primary
reason
for
the
delta.
One
method
may
not
capture
one
group
in
the
other,
and
the
other
method
may
not
capture
a
different
group,
for
example.
E
So
I
know
that
the
staff
delta
between
projection
is
about
30
000
off
in
2021,
but
compared
to
the
stats,
can
post
sensor
estimates
what
10
000
off,
which
isn't
as
as
far
as
the
staff
estimates.
So
when
we
do
conduct
our
projections
we
always
use
or
the
product,
the
practice
has
been
to
use
the
latest
statistics,
canada,
post
central
estimates,
and
so
when
we
look
at
the
next
one,
if
we
want
to
continue
using
that,
that
will
be
the
new
baseline
going
forward
throughout
the
projection
period.
Okay,
I.
C
Just
I
wonder
you
know
whether
it's
a
big
enough
difference
because,
of
course,
obviously
adding
land
into
the
urban
boundary
and
setting
intensification
targets
depends
on
you
know
what
our
population
projections
are.
I'm
going
into
every
one
of
my
contentious
development,
open
houses
telling
folks
you
know
what
we've
got.
Four
hundred
thousand
people
who
are
going
to
be
moving
into
the
city
over
the
course
of
the
next
24-
and
I
guess,
probably
not
20
23
years-
is
that
still
accurate?
E
So,
mr
chair,
with
kovid
and
the
lag
and
stats
canada's
potential
estimates,
we
won't
have
an
accurate
comparison
between
what
we
see
from
statistics,
canada
and
on
projections
for
another
two
years
and
at
that
time
we're
also
going
through
a
post-pandemic
recovery.
So
things
can
also
change
going
forward
in
the
next
few
years.
So
it's
really
hard
to
say
now,
if
there's
any
delta,
between
the
projections
and
what's
occurring
on
the
ground,
whether
that
would
continue
forward
or
if
that
would
change.
E
E
C
I
just
I'm
wondering
in
terms
of
what's
going
to
shake
out
over
the
next
couple
years.
We've
got
labor
challenges,
supply,
chain
challenges,
inflation,
challenges,
construction,
cost
challenges
and
what
I'm
hearing
through
the
industry
are.
You
know
significant
rumblings
of
projects
that
are
grinding
to
a
halt
that
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
particularly
purpose-built
rental.
That
is
just
not
going
to
move
ahead
over
the
course
of
the
next
several
years
because
of
some
of
the
broader
macroeconomic
trends.
E
I
share
many
of
the
same
views
in
terms
of
the
supply
constraints,
not
just
the
regulatory
framework
that
the
municipality
is
is
in
charge
of,
but
it's
also
very
factors
that
you
had
just
mentioned
or
test
keeper
just
mentioned,
being
labor
cost
materials,
ability
to
get
materials
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
Yeah.
C
I
think
we're
going
to
be
hearing
from
the
industry
associated
with
the
next
issue
on
cbc's,
so
I
might
just
prepare
them
to
to
answer
sort
of
the
same
question
if
it's
a
bit
off
topic,
but
I'm
curious
to
get
their
view.
Okay.
So
the
the
bigger
message
I'm
hearing
today,
though,
is
that
it's
it's
too
soon
to
suggest
that
we
should
be
revising
growth
management
strategy.
Estimates
based
on
a
slight
difference
in
what
we're
seeing
in
terms
of
the
2021
growth
numbers,
as
reported
in
the
adr.
E
C
F
Thanks
very
much
chair
and
just
similar
to
counselor
lee
first
questions.
I
targeted
population
more
than
anything
and
some
housing
starts,
but
I
think
we
saw
last
year
the
most
housing
starts
in
a
year
since
2001,
according
to
the
report,
and
so
we
approved,
we
approved
a
lot
and
a
lot
of
housing
starts
happened
last
year
and
I
just
wanted
to
go
through
our
op
definition
of
intensification
and
compare
that
to
what
we're
actually
achieving.
F
As
people
will
know,
we
changed
the
op
definition
from
the
old
definition
to
the
the
new
definition
royce.
I
read
this
as
under
both
scenarios
under
the
old
definition
in
the
new
definition
we
we
are
outpacing
the
proportion
of
intensification
that
we
said
we
would
be
having
from
that
2017
to
2021
period.
The
new
op
definition
and
the
old
definition
is
that
correct.
It
looks
like
we're
outpacing
on
both
sides
of
those
both
definitions.
E
So,
mr
chair,
the
overall
number
is
correct.
I
would
just
focus
on
the
new
official
plan.
However,
while
the
overall
number
is
correct,
committee
may
recall,
from
the
new
official
plan
and
adoption
of
the
residential
growth
management
strategy,
there
was
a
desire
to
also
try
to
increase
the
number
of
large
dwellings
or
three.
You
know,
basically,
three
bedrooms
or
more
dwellings
through
intensification
in
order
to
offer
more
choice
within
the
built
up
area.
E
F
E
F
So
we're
putting
huge
pressure
on
taxes
to
expand
the
urban
boundary,
and
I
guess
the
concern
is
we're
intensifying
more
than
we
said.
We
would
intensify
up
to
the
projections
of
I
think
decades
into
the
future.
We're
doing
that
right
now
and
to
cancer.
Leaper's
point:
there's
some
concern
about
population.
F
F
They
should
have
proven
a
controversial
vote
to
expand
that
urban
boundary
as
much
as
we
said,
especially
in
areas
where
we
shouldn't
be
expanding
like
in
the
south
of
the
city
and
so
I'll
just
leave
it
there.
I
suppose,
but
I
hope
that
we
are
looking
at
where
we
said
we
would
go
where
we're
at
now
and
what
we
might
be
able
to
do
to
rein
in
some
of
that
sprawl.
F
D
Mr
chair,
I
I
do
think
it
is
important
to
remind
the
committee
that,
as
part
of
the
official
plan
framework,
we
do
have
an
official
plan
monitoring
process.
That
will
also
follow
up
from
this
from
this
meeting,
and
we
are
looking
to
bring
that
framework
back
to
committee
at
the
end
of
this
year
and
then
to
provide
a
more
fulsome
methodology
for
how
we
propose
to
monitor
some
of
those
official
plan
projections
in
the
in
the
new
term.
A
Thanks
counselor
one
one
stat
that
that
I
was
comparing,
so
we
had
a
rate
of
growth
of
1.8
percent
and
I
believe
the
ontario
affordability
task
force
said
that
ontario
would
have
to
achieve
a
10
growth
rate
over
the
next
10
years,
so
we're
not
even
at
2,
so
there's
a
obviously
a
big
gap
there.
It's
not
a
question,
just
observation
on
on
supply
and
housing
growth
projections.
A
Thank
you
staff
for
this.
I
think,
on
a
yearly
basis.
I
always
look
forward
to
this
report
as
a
snapshot
snapshot
as
to
what's
going
on.
I
think
it's
very
well
produced
with
the
graphics
and
infographics
and
information
and
required
reading
for
any
member
of
council
for
sure.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
to
us
today
are
the
is
the
report
received.
A
This
is
an
application
for
demolition
and
new
construction
at
229,
231,
241,
245
and
247
beechwood
avenue
properties
designated
under
part
five
of
the
ontario
heritage
act.
This
was
at
built
heritage
subcommittee
on
tuesday
morning.
Some
of
you
were
there
and
the
recommendation
was
to
refuse
demolition,
and
I
just
want
to
read
the
report
recommendation
as
it
is
in
our
planning
agenda.
A
That
planning
committee
recommend
that
council
refuse
the
applications
for
demolition
and
new
construction
at
229,
231,
241,
245
and
247
beechwood
avenue,
according
to
plans
prepared
by
woodman
architect
and
associates,
received
on
april
1st
2022
and
attached
its
documents,
five,
six
and
seven.
So
we're
not
dealing
with
the
zoning
by
amendment
or
or
an
official
plan
amendment.
This
is,
strictly
speaking,
an
application
for
demolition,
as
it
relates
to
a
property
designated
under
the
ontario
heritage
act.
We
had
held
this
for
delegation,
michelle
heyman,
but
she
has
left.
A
B
B
We
do
recognize,
there's
quite
a
it's
been
a
packed
agenda
today
we
have
prepared
presentations
to
provide
brief
overviews
from
both
myself
and
the
project
heritage
consultant.
John
stewart.
So
we
request,
if,
if
the
committee
would
allow
additional
time
if
needed,
to
go
beyond
the
five
minutes,
that's
typically
allocated.
A
B
So
my
name
is
caleb
blakely,
I'm
a
planner
with
nova
tech.
I
am
representing
smart
living
properties,
they're
a
client
of
ours.
Now
they
specialize
in
quality
rental
accommodations
across
the
city,
focusing
at
prime
locations
that
are
walkable
well
served
by
transit,
so
the
site
that
is
the
subject
of
the
applications
today
are
along
beechwood
avenue.
B
We
wish
to
present
to
committee
today,
as
although
staff
in
the
report,
they
do
recognize,
there's
been
a
high
level
of
collaboration
on
these
applications
and
some
positive
changes.
We
cannot
agree
with
the
recommendation.
That's
before
you,
in
our
opinion,
does
not
have
appropriate
regard
for
the
distinct
character
of
this
area
being
a
more
transitional
and
eclectic
neighborhood.
Nor
does
it
have
regard
for
the
function
of
beechwood
avenue
as
a
main.
B
B
The
this
area
of
rockcliff
park
is
referred
to
as
the
panhandle.
It
differs
substantially
from
the
interior
rock
lift
where
buildings
have
more
presence
along
the
street.
Greater
lot
coverage,
smaller
gaps
between
buildings,
as
well
as
more
breaks
in
landscaping
for
driveways
parking,
hard
surfaces.
B
B
Further
of
note,
these
sites
are
zoned
residential,
fourth
density,
their
site-specific
zoning
and
those
provisions
have
informed
the
design
in
terms
of
setbacks,
parking
height,
to
ensure
complying
incompatible
within
the
neighborhood.
If
we
continue,
I
will
skip
this
as
jon.
Stewart
will
speak
more
to
that.
A
B
A
C
Thanks
so
in
your
view-
and
I
I've
only
had
a
chance
to
briefly
look
at
this
report,
so
I'm
counting
on
delegates
here
to
help
me
understand
this
one
completely
and
fully.
Your
interpretation
of
what
has
happened
here
is
that
the
demo
or
the
the
heritage
permission
to
remove
the
building
as
which
you
require
as
part
of
the
heritage
conservation
district
regime
was
denied,
because
the
building
is
too
big.
B
Through
you,
mr
chair,
yes,
the
the
staff
have
brave
concern
in
relation
to
the
massing
and
therefore
the
ability
to
provide
soft
landscaping
and
achieve
a
park-like
setting.
It
was
more
our
our
position
that
those
standards
shouldn't
impose
requirements
that
are
contrary
to
the
permissions
that
are
set
up
in.
C
B
C
B
C
But
I
guess
one
of
the
issues
is
that
those
I
take
it
it's
an
r4u
subzone
of
some
sort.
The
heritage
would
contemplate
that.
That
would
be
multiple
different
buildings,
each
of
which
would
have
those
setbacks.
I
take
it.
There's
been
some
assembly
here
in
order
to
propose
this
and
then
the
meter
and
a
half
you
know,
side,
yard
setback
or
whatever
it
is
is,
is
much
less
meaningful
when
it's
a
single
building
over
an
assembled
parcel.
B
C
But
when
you
yes,
so
when
you
assemble
those
parcels,
it's
it's
fairly
easy
to
meet
the
the
whatever
our
four
sub
zone.
It
is,
b
or
c
or
whatever,
but
heritage
staff
consider
that
the
the
buildings
is
larger
than
is
characteristic
or
larger
than
what
the
heritage
conservation
district
would
would
anticipate
or
or
allow
okay.
I
think
I'm
starting
to
get
it.
It's
perfect.
G
A
I
have
a
question,
I
suppose,
for
jon
stewart
who
wrote
the
heritage
conservation
statement.
Staff
staff's
opinion
is
that,
as
designed,
this
building
does
not
the
cultural
heritage.
Values
will
not
be
conserved,
so
obviously
you
disagree.
What
specific
areas
at
this
point
are
the
the
two
parties
in
disagreement
with.
H
H
The
heritage
conservation
district
calls
for
sort
of
a
the
kefir
vision
of
picturesque
landscape,
villa
lots
and
a
great
deal
more
soft
landscape,
and
they
also
do
not
seem
to
recognize
that
there
is.
There
is
within
the
planning
act
the
opportunity
to
introduce
apartments
in
this
particular
location.
H
A
H
D
D
H
Maybe,
while
it's
coming
up,
I
can
speak
a
little
bit
towards
it
and
sort
of
move
through
some
of
the.
But
basically,
when
you
take
a
look
at
the
planning
framework
that
we
came
from,
we
looked
at
the
this.
Is
it
you
know
next
slide,
please
we
looked
at
the
official
plan
and
within
the
official
plan,
the
secondary
plan.
H
There
are
two
areas
within
rock
cliff
that
make
a
lands
have
lands
designated
residential
multi-family
they're
indicated
on
the
blue
arrows
the
the
arrow
at
the
bottom
of
the
of
the
image
that's
in
the
panhandle
and
basically
the
residential
density
makes
allowance
for
a
number
of
different
types
of
of
housing.
Single-Family
dwelling,
two-family
dwelling
semi-detached
and
apartments
next
slide.
Please
you
take
a
look
at
it
at
this
particular
location.
H
H
There
are
a
series
of
six
town
houses,
three
story,
towns
next
slide,
the
policy
framework
for
rockford
park,
the
it
identifies
the
panhandles
as
a
distinct
area
and
in
the
heritage
defining
attributes
it
describes
the
multi-unit
buildings,
small
lots
and
more
modest
housing
which,
which
is
in
part.
The
rationale
for
moving
forward
is
in
fact,
that
it
is
a
distinct
area.
H
H
Of
historic
places
in
canada,
it
was
used
to
to
evaluate
the
proposal
and
the
intent
of
the
guidelines
is
conservation
and
what's
happening
here.
Is
the
conservation
or
the
expectation
is
the?
It
will
be
the
conservation
of
this
bigger,
the
overall
village
of
rockcliff,
as
opposed
to
this
distinct
area,
and
it
ends
up
with
rather
than
being
concert
conservation,
it
ends
up
being
introduced,
features
and
definitely
a
very,
very
elegant,
very
lovely
design,
but
not
appropriate
for
this
particular
part
of
the
rocklift
park.
H
Next,
this
is
useful
in
understanding
the
scale
of
the
project
and
the
reference
in
the
background
are
the
are
the
buildings
the
proposed
buildings
in
the
foreground.
They
applied
the
existing
buildings,
so
you
see
on
the
left-hand
side
the
two
residential
buildings,
how
close
together
they
are
on
the
on
the
lot.
The
vacant
lot
beside
is
acknowledged,
and
the
scale
of
the
of
that
particular
portion
is
used
in
the
material
change.
The
height
is
is
meets
the
three-story
height
and
then
on
the
other
side.
H
The
height
is,
is
one
story
higher,
but
in
fact
that
repetition
and
scale
along
the
street
is
the
attempt
has
been
made
to
maintain
it
next
slide.
Please,
in
terms
of
intensification,
the
op
policy
does
not
set
up
specific
requirements
relating
to
scale
or
density,
but
does
state
that
the
height
massing
setbacks
and
parking
areas
of
any
development
in
the
area
shall
be
compatible
with
the
development
in
the
adjacent
areas
designated
residential.
So
this
particular.
H
In
the
background,
and
as
you
can
see
with
the
slope,
these
apartments
don't
intrude
into
the
landscape
from
rockcliff,
and
the
other
point
that
I
like
to
make
is
that
the
the
townhouses
themselves
on
front
onto
a
street-
they
don't
have
the
the
characteristics
described
in
the
and
in
the
guidelines
for
for
new
buildings
in
in
the
rock
lift
park.
They
they
are.
They
recogni.
In
this
case
the
guidelines
have
right
recognized
the
the
the
townhouses
as
a
distinct
distinctly
part
of
the
panhandle
next
slide.
H
Please,
and
just
in
conclusion,
the
official
plan,
the
secondary
plan,
the
beechwood
community
plan,
the
traditional
main
street
zoning,
offer
guidance
for
the
development
proposal.
Although
the
acd
identifies
the
panhandle
area
and
its
multiple
unit
buildings,
it
does
not
provide
any
form
of
guidance
for
for
new
multi-unit
development.
H
H
C
So
and
again,
just
as
I
get
caught
up
to
speed
on
this,
the
this
is
a
traditional
main
street,
which
seems
to
call
for
something,
like
you
know,
a
large
multi-unit
building.
That
would
be
in
keeping
with
what
our
official
plan
says.
We
want
to
build
on
traditional
main
streets,
but
a
very
strict
interpretation
of
the
heritage
conservation
district
guidelines
would
essentially
prohibit
the
kind
of
development
that
we
want
to
see
on
rtms.
C
C
H
G
And
I'd
like
to
point
it
out
too,
I
mean
it's:
it's
really
at
the
very
edge
of
the
rocks
of
heritage
park
and
across
the
streets,
a
12-story
building
that
was
built
about
10
years
ago
in
the
kavanaugh.
It's
it's
a
transition
space
and
we're
trying
our
best
to
create
something
which
cares
for
that
transition
into
what
is
the
park-like
setting
from
a
traditional
main
street.
You
know
it
is
a
residentially
zoned
area.
G
Unlike
a
tm
zone,
it
doesn't
have
tmz
which
traditionally
we
would
see
down
the
traditional
main
street,
so
commercial
ground,
floor,
commercial
and
that
kind
of
oriented
stuff
isn't
there.
The
setbacks
are
that
of
a
residential
zone.
4.5
meters
we're
respecting
that
the
city
is
taking
a
road
widening
allowance
as
part
of
that
for
future
transit,
oriented
bikes
and
all
that
stuff.
Along
there
I
mean
it's
a
long-term
goal,
there's
a
number
of
properties
that
are
built
very,
very
close
to
the
street
edge
as
you
transition
down
beachwood
towards
towards
the
river.
G
A
C
G
It's
it's
two
blocks
in
the
left,
one
which
is
sort
of
double
odd
and
then
one
which
is
a
single
law
and
then
on
the
law
on
the
right.
It's
three:
it's
three
blocks.
It's
right,
three
lots
that
are
there
there
there's
I
mean
we've
tried
an
approach
around
carsdale
road,
which
is
a
dead-end
road
which
goes
nowhere,
which
I
guess
at
some
point
in
its
history
was
closed,
so
that
black
people
private
could
be
built
from
the
back
end.
So
it
just
runs
to
the
backyards
of
these
properties.
G
You
know
we
thought
it
would
be
great
for
a
park
like
setting
to
create
the
huge
buffer
between
the
two
buildings
right.
I
think
it's
almost
eleven.
I
have
to
go
back
and
check
it,
but
carsdale
road
is
owned
by
the
city,
so
we're
offering
the
landscape
to
turn
into
a
park.
You
know
that's
been
part
of
the
innovations
we
we
did
a
pre-consult
on
this.
G
In
the
summer
of
2020,
we
submitted
our
first
cycle
in
december
of
2020
and
we've
been
through
formally
three
applications,
but
informally
with
heritage
staff
and
planning
stuff,
probably
about
seven
or
eight
different
designs.
In
terms
of
our
architecture
and
stepping
back
upper
stories-
and
you
know,
we
have
really
tried
to
create
that
with
many
different
options
on
landscaping
we've,
you
know
trying
to
recreate
these.
G
The
small
rock
walls-
big
rock
walls,
greenscaping
water,
fountains-
we've
we've
been
through
it
all
in
terms
of
trying
to
create
that
landscaping
buffer
that
that
grants
that
feel,
but
also
still
you
know,
is
still
a
traditional
main
street
and
provides
some
density
along
a
a
zero
parking
area.
So
we
moved
our
parking
indoors
just
to
for
our
visitor
parking.
This
is
a
zero
parking
hearing.
It's
a
traditional
main
street
that
doesn't
require
it's
supposed
to
be
active,
transit
oriented.
You
know,
we've
got
you
know
a
one-to-one
bike
ratio
in
the
basement.
C
G
Early
in
the
option
in
the
operation
we
looked
at
acquiring
it.
The
issue
is
that,
although
cars
deal
is
no
longer
a
road
that
goes
anywhere,
there
is
city
infrastructure
that
runs
underneath
so
there's
a
major
storm
in
sanitary
that
runs
through
there.
So
the
city
wanted
to
sell
it
to
us,
but
we
needed
to
retain
the
ability
to
maintain
those
services,
so
it
was
really
just
for
land
to
to
greenscape.
I
Sorry,
I
I
have
a
comment
following
on
john's
presentation
that
I
think
is
important
to
know:
heritage
staff
take
the
position
that
the
heritage
conservation
district
plan
trump's
zoning-
it
doesn't
it
trumps,
zoning
adopted
after
the
hcvp
what
it.
What
it
does,
however,
is
need
to
take
account
of
existing
zoning,
the
zoning,
the
a
designation
of
beechwood
as
traditional
main
street,
all
pre-existed.
I
What
is
a
relatively
new
heritage
conservation
district
plan
and
what
the
tribunal
has
said
in
similar
circumstances
is
look.
The
city
had
plenty
of
time
to
change
the
zoning
it
chose
not
to,
therefore
the
zoning
stands,
and
so
there
there
is
no
issue
about
land
assembly
or
anything
of
that
kind.
We've
got,
as
the
councilor
has
pointed
out,
a
heritage
con
a
traditional
main
street,
which
is
meant
for
a
particular
purpose.
We
have
existing
zoning
that
supports
this
development
and,
unfortunately,
heritage
staff
have
said
well.
I
A
A
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
you
know,
there's
been
lots
of
conversation.
I
think
today
about
adding
density
and
intensification
here,
and
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
I
don't
in
staff's
opinion.
This
isn't
really
an
argument
about.
You
know
whether
additional
units
or
or
intensification
can
happen
in
this
location.
I
think
it
could
certainly
be
appropriate
in
this
part
of
the
panhandle
within
the
hcd.
J
There
are
other
examples
where
the
where
heritage
planning,
staff
and
and
council
have
approved
other
multi-unit
projects
in
the
panhandle
in
in
rockland
park,
but
also,
of
course,
across
the
city
and
other
hcds.
I
think
the
concern
here
is
the
way
that
it's
being
achieved.
It's
it's
the,
how
it's
not
the
what
and
the
city
does
have
official
plan
policies
that
speak
to
you
know
achieving
intensification
goals
in
hcds
through
context,
sensitive
infill,
provided
that
the
cultural
heritage,
values
and
attributes
can
be
conserved.
J
So
I
think
you
know
just
going
back
to
about
the
way
it's
being
achieved.
I
think
in
this
case
the
zoning
is
the
zoning.
Is
there,
but
it's
being
essentially
maxed
out.
So
I
think
you
know
that
the
zoning
may
permit
more,
but
but
the
hcd
plan
is
more
specific
and
that
policy
framework
still
needs
to
be
to
be
met.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
think
this
question
was
asked
to
build
here
to
subcommittee.
In
a
way,
are
they
are
they
close
to
meeting
what
you
would
consider
acceptable?
Is
this
something
where,
if
you
had
another
few
weeks
to
work
on
it,
how
confident
are
you
that
you
could
find
a
solution
or
compromise
or
is
it
is
it?
Is
it
not
that
simple.
J
I
think
thank
you
chair.
I
think
we
have
been
working
quite
hard
with
the
applicant.
I
think
kayla
mentioned
in
her
presentation.
It's
been
about
two
years
that
we've
been
back
and
forth
on
this.
I
think
there
would
need
to
be.
You
know
a
substantial
shift,
it's
not
just
sort
of
the
size,
I
think
it's
and
size,
I
think,
has
a
number
of
components.
J
It's
it's
sort
of
the
arrangement
of
the
mass
which
which
goes
along
with
kind
of
those
setbacks
and
the
form
and
location
on
the
lot
which
in
turn,
I
think,
speaks
you
know
goes
along
with
the
design
and
architectural
expression
which
you
know
in
my
staff
report
in
the
staff
report.
We've
we've
mentioned
is
also
a
concern.
All
of
those
pieces
go
together,
so
I
think
it
would
be
to
be.
It
would
need
to
be
a
substantial
shift.
I
don't
know
you
know.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
so
staff
are
recommending
refusal
and
bill
target
subcommittee
supported
that
recommendation.
Do
you
remember
what
do
you
recall
what
the
vote
was
on
tuesday?
Was
it
unanimous
from
the
committee?
The
heritage
committee
was
unanimous
and
seeing
scott
not
in
his
head,
okay,
councillor
lieber.
J
C
Does
it
matter
what's
there
right
now,
because
when
I,
when
I
take
a
look
at
the
the
existing
buildings
on
these
lots,
you
know
the
side
yard
in
in
one
is
an
asphalt,
drive,
a
driveway
that
leads
presumably
to
rear
yard
parking
space.
Another
one
is
kind
of
brick
with
a
little
bit
of
a
tiny
bit
of
grass.
J
Thank
you,
and,
and
through
your
chair,
the
surrounding
properties,
I
think
in
in
certainly
this
stretch
of
of
beechwood
are
considered
grade
two
in
the
hcd,
but
they
do
sort
of
this
area
of
the
panhandle.
I
think,
as
mentioned
in
the
applicants,
one
of
the
questions
or
one
of
the
applicants
that
answers
spoke
to
transition,
and
so
I
think
in
this
this
location
in
particular
we're
looking
for
that
transition
component
as
well,
and
certainly
you
know
this.
J
This
project
went
to
the
udrp,
and
the
panel
spoke
to
you
know
needing
better
integration.
With
with
that
context,
that
neighborhood
context
they
made
recommendations
about,
you
know
having
potential,
potentially
ground
oriented
units.
Picking
up
some
of
those
more
traditional
features
that
even
the
buildings
that
that
are
there
today
could
be
reflected.
So
you
know,
patterns
of
porches
and
and
main
entrances.
J
You
notice
in
in
this
project,
the
the
main
entrance
is
located
in
the
basement,
the
sunken
basement
level,
which
is
out
of
character
and
whereas
in
the
in
the
streetscape
typically
buildings
have
their
entrance
at
grade
or
a
couple
of
steps
up
with
a
porch.
The
applicant
could
look
at
different
window
patterns,
picking
up
some
of
those
those
cues.
I
think
that's
what
we
would
be
looking
for.
C
J
Thank
you
counselor
and
three
chair.
I
I
think
they
are
both
policy
frameworks
that
need
to
be
considered
and
need
to
be
met.
As
I
you
know,
I
mentioned
that
the
hcd
plan
is
very
specific.
I
think
there
needs
to
be.
You
know
it's
it's
a
it's
a
plan
that
that
speaks
to
the
character
of
the
area
and
it
informs
this
is
a
heritage,
permit
application,
and
then
that
is
what
we're
looking
for.
J
H
C
A
A
E
D
C
A
Okay,
thank
you
kelly.
We
will
move
to
the
next
item.
It's
item
5.9
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
280,
laurier
avenue
east
in
rito,
vanier
now,
councillor
fleury
had
a
motion
and
we
held
this.
I
held
this
for
discussion,
I'm
not
sure.
If
counselor
hillary
is
back.
I
did
give
him
a
heads
up
about
10
minutes
ago
that
we
were
coming
back
to.
This
is
counselor
flurry
in
the
room
or
the
panelist
room
or
the
attendee
room.
A
A
K
A
A
K
K
So
through
you
chair,
I
said
I'd
keep
this
brief
and
I
will-
and
I
do
want
to
thank
jessica
and
city
staff
for
their
work
on
this
file.
So
I'm
lisa,
dela
rosa
an
associate
with
photon
planning
and
design,
and
I'm
here
today
with
a
couple
of
representatives
representatives
from
smart
living
who
are
both
the
owners
and
property
managers
of
280
laurier
avenue
east.
K
K
Low-Rise
apartment
that'll
include
updating
the
amenity,
spaces,
landscaping
and
waste
collection
for
the
entirety
of
the
address,
so
don't
have
to
spend
too
much
time
here.
We
are
all
familiar
with
this
part
of
the
city
and
agree
that
sandy
hill
is
a
great
example
of
a
15-minute
neighborhood.
It's
close
to
many
community
amenities,
including
commercial
recreation
and
educational
uses.
K
K
So,
in
addition
to
being
a
15-minute
neighborhood,
the
development
will
be
providing
one-to-one
bike
parking
for
the
entirety
of
the
address.
So
that's,
including
the
existing
units.
The
product
is
within
one
kilometer
of
two
lrt
stations
and
there
is
a
bus
route
that
runs
along
laurier
with
stops
right
in
front.
K
Tenants
will
be
informed
that
no
parking
is
available
on
site
and
they
will
receive
a
pre-loaded
presto
card
at
move-in.
There's
on-street
parking
available
along
laurier
for
short-term
parking,
as
required
and
further
for
those
needing
that
occasional
car.
There
are
several
car
sharing
locations
close
by,
as
mentioned,
the
development
is
proposed
to
maintain
the
existing
building
and
replace
the
existing
parking
lot
with
a
three-story
residential
edition.
The
addition
will
add
18
new
apartment
units
to
the
40
already
instance.
K
The
proposal
includes
the
introduction
of
an
enclosed
accessory
waste
building
in
the
rear
yard.
This
will
be
an
improvement
from
the
current
situation,
which
is
exposed
bins
in
the
parking
lot
visible
from
laurier.
A
garbage
room
within
the
main
building
was
explored,
but
it
did
not.
It
did
result
in
the
loss
of
at
least
two
units,
and
it
would
be
noted
that
the
addition
is
not
internally
connected
to
the
existing
building.
K
So
tenants
would
have
to
leave
to
then
enter
the
addition
to
put
their
garbage,
so
it
was
felt
that
a
more
convenient
location
for
that
garbage
would
be
an
exterior
accessory
building
that
exterior
building
has
been
discussed
with
city
staff
and
we
do
meet
the
sections
of
the
zoning
bylaw.
With
regards
to
waste
management.
K
K
K
The
recommended
amendment
to
the
r4ud
zone
are
on
the
screen.
We
echo
staff's
position
that
these
amendments
are
supported
by
both
the
existing
official
plan
and
the
new
official
plan
by
providing
a
range
of
housing,
intensification
that
prioritizes
walking,
cycling
and
transit
within
and
to
and
from
the
downtown
core.
The
proposed
development
uphold
the
intent
of
the
r4d
zone
and
is
compatible
with
the
surrounding
uses,
and
with
that
I'll
conclude
and
we're
happy
to
answer
any
questions,
you
guys
have.
A
C
K
C
K
C
Yeah,
as
I
go
down
sweetland,
I
don't
see
any
indication
that
there's
street
permits
available.
So
it's
the
same
thing.
I
ask
all
the
the
landlords
and
developers
these
days
is
is
not
only
should
you
be
telling
prospective
tenants
that
there
is
no
parking
available
on
site.
I,
oh
I'm
sorry.
I
just
saw
the
sign
there's
a
little
bit
of
permit
parking.
You
should
be
warning
tenants
as
well
that
it's
going
to
be
extremely
challenging
to
park
their
cars
in
the
neighborhood.
C
Too
often,
we
see
developments
where
residents
are
told
yeah
that
you
can't
get
any
parking
as
part
of
the
lease,
but
you
know
they're
they're
led
to
believe
that
there's
a
lot
of
permit
parking
or
easy
street
parking
in
the
area
and
when
they
find
out
that
there
isn't,
they
start
calling
calling
my
office
and
I'm
not
in
a
position
to
help,
so
that's
very
stressful
for
them,
obviously
yeah
and
otherwise.
No,
I
I
just
wonder
why
you're
in
front
of
us
and
not
in
front
of
the
cfa.
K
C
A
G
Yeah
we're
seeing
it
as
a
condition
of
site
plan
is
that
we
do
traditionally
now
put
these
notices
on
our
it's
a
requirement
of
our
site
plan
to
put
these
notices
on
our
leases,
so
we
are
prepared
for
that.
It
would
be
nice
to
note
that
by
moving
a
curb
cut
along
laurier,
we
are
adding
a
potential
visitor
space
for
the
local
commercial,
as
well
as
the
building
in
a
temporary
manner
as
the
as
the
hourly
parking
that's
out
there.
So
that's
it.
A
K
A
K
That's
correct:
we
can
go
into
it
a
bit
further,
but
because
we've
got
some
barrier-free
units
in
the
existing
matching
grades
of
the
edition
and
the
new
you
can't
actually
connect
in
between
the
building
so
putting
the
garbage
in
the
addition,
in
addition
to
losing
units,
you
also
have
the
inconvenience.
Now
if
you
live
in
the
existing
building,
you
have
to
leave
the
building
go
into
your
neighboring
building,
to
put
your
garbage
away.
K
We
are
aware
that
in
the
past
there
has
been
concerns
with
this
building,
but
that
was
partly
due
to
how
it
was
organized
and
who
was
owning
it
with
a
building
this
size,
property
management,
smart
living
does
have
people
on
on
staff
that
are
frequently
in
these
buildings,
if
not
live
on-site
supers,
so
that
they
can
manage
that
garbage
and
there's
now
a
specific
place
for
it.
That's
out
of
sight
out
of
mind-
and
you
know,
protected
from
those
elements
such
as
noxious
noise,
noises
or
not.
K
A
D
Sure
we
do
have
a
site
plan
light
which
requires
anyone,
that's
adding
units
in
sandy
hill
to
comply
to
basically
go
through
site
plan.
In
this
case
it
is
a
rezoning,
but
the
the
history
behind
that
is
really
nine.
Zoning
reports
in
sandy
hill
and
unfortunately,
this
applicant
has
been
part
of
the
reason,
not
the
singular
reason,
but
part
of
the
reasons
as
to
why
we've
had
to
do
nine
zoning
reports
in
sandy
hill-
and
you
know,
obviously
work
closely
with
planning
staff
with
with
bylaw.